Pink Poogle Toy Forum

Do you have a copy of the contract Neopets has with their ad company? Because if you don't, how do you know this? Have you ever been involved with advertising? I have, and unless the advertiser is crazy, they're not going to be paying much at all for a simple "viewing" of an ad. Especially nowadays with everyone having ad blocker hooked up to their browsers.

I am glad that I am not the only one who wondered about the editorial.

Two things:

1. I am not convinced that Neopets isn't making big bucks without the addition of the neocash feature. I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't just a way to make even more money. Nothing wrong with this. They are a business, and if a business wishes to make as much money as possible for the owners, then that's to be expected. The way the editorials were written, one could assume that Neopets is on the brink of going bankrupt. I am not convinced about this, but since I don't know, I am remaining neutral.

2. I am disturbed about the comment about how you can't be held to a promise you made years ago. Then they go on to promise that neopets will continue to have free aspects. The first statement makes the second questionable.

You keep asking for documents IcyBlue, and I've shown that Viacom is making money, but have you shown any documents to back up your claims in favor of blindly believing Neopets? Nope.

Why would Viacom pay $160 million for something that would lose them money? If the site was near bankruptcy as the editorial makes you think, wouldn't they do something more aggresive, such as make the site a pay site? They're not doing that because they don't need to...they're making money.

What they're doing is slowly changing the atmosphere of the site and hoping they don't offend too many people. Whereas immediately making the site a paysite would cause a lot of people to quit, doing it in steps makes people more docile. They already have successfully implemented "optional" Premium membership...now "optional" NeoCash...it will just get worse and worse because people like you blindly believe what they tell you and stand behind them. They don't need to do this to keep the site running, they do it to exploit us and make profit. I've taken marketing classes as part of my Business major and I know what they're doing, and its brilliant in a sickening kind of way. And what do all of you do? Accept it, without challenging the fact they aren't improving the site in the process.


Edit: Oh, and here:

http://media.seekingalpha.com/article/15318

"Consistent with our strategy, we parlayed our acquisition of Neopets into a leadership position in the kids' online advertising space, where now, in combination with Nickelodeon, we have a 60% market share with kids. Neopets traffic is up 13% versus last year, and revenue is on track to be up 40%."

Being aware of various factors affecting an issue does not mean we are 'brainwashed'. There's really no call to talk down to people. Arka's points, however, are good ones.

http://www.hoovers.com/neopets/--ID__11 ... heet.xhtml is the link on that website directly relating to Neopets, Inc. There are not so many numbers, but the page lists total annual sales at $6.7 million dollars. In the grand corporate world, that is not much at all - and as I understand it, that is not profit, that's sales. The huge running costs of sustaining one of the most visited sites on the web are not accounted for in that number. It puts it further into perspective when you consider that Viacom bought Neopets, Inc. for $160 million dollars. Neopets, Inc. does not have to be on the brink of going bankrupt to make it need to earn more money urgently. What the editorial says is quite true: breaking even is not enough, because if the site does not make a healthy profit, its investors will take their money and go elsewhere and then FWOOM, you're suddenly not breaking even and Neopets dies. For good.

I feel Viacom are going the wrong way about making a profit, though - neglecting the site and its community is, in my opinion, a bad business decision. And I'm not too bothered about defending giant corporations that I feel have no place in the site's creative decisions anyway.

I DO defend the people who make up the majority of the entity we know as "TNT", who I believe are trying their hardest to do what's best for the community. Sadly, it feels like their hands are tied.

I am merely showing that TNT are using the words they use to manipulate people. I for one have parents who RECENTLY broke up over money. I do not need to have TNT make me feel bad so that I can go "wow they understand me, they are right." What they said is disgusting. I can relate to what I am saying. I go on Neopets to meet new people, to escape the harsh reality of my disfunctional family and be have fun and be free of what the real world offers sometimes. What they said is out of line and inappropriate. It can hurt little kids.

A human mind is fragile and very easy to manipulate. If you read through hat they are saying you can see they chose their words to make us think they are our friends. When you like you contradict yourself. in that editorial alone they do that a lot.

I think yall are confusing Viacom with TNT.

Viacom:


TNT:


Those multimillionaires are the ones on top. Neopets was getting too popular to be run as a small company, so a bigger company with enough money to invest in them had to pick them up. That big company just happens to be greedy. HOW UNHEARD OF!!!!!!!!! Don't blame Adam Donna and Snarkie and Mr Insane and Lawyerbot and all them. They're trying to keep Neo in the spirit it used to, but it's not exactly a good idea to argue with the president of your company if he wants CASH CASH CASH NOW NOW NOW.

Regardless of how well or poorly or effectively or offensively they worded their points, here's the thing:
The neomall is not required.
Buying the TCG cards is not required.
Joining Premium is not required.
Spending money, in any manner, is not required.

I have given Neopets precisely zero dollars since I joined in spring 2002. And I'm still having plenty of fun on the site, and I'm still doing just fine reaching my goals.

They are a business. They have to turn a profit or they will not survive. Even nonprofit organizations strive to turn a profit every year (which may seem confusing, but they can and do, and are encouraged to, and it's perfectly legal. PM me for more info if you like, I'd like to do my part to keep this thread on topic).

So they want to turn a profit. They want, because their parent company wants, to return a high value to investors who buy their stock.

They have found a manner to do so that doesn't unbalance the game. None of these things in the mall DO anything. I think they look rather goofy, myself. None of the items are species-specific, so there's no worry about gallery owners having to spend money on them.

So these are just for people who want to buy a diving helmet. They can't be traded from account to account, they just sit on your pet and make your pet look a little more or less anthro.

I understand that it seems weird, or strange, or off-kilter, or whatever. But it's a business - they're making a business decision that does nothing to affect the actual mechanisms of the game. Maybe I'm too trusting, but I fail to see where this changes ANYTHING.

Shapu you are a very wellread person and I agree with what you are saying. This "debate" (if you want to call it that) is not about selling things for real money as much as how they sell them, the lies TNT are throwing at us and the pure manipulation behind their words.

Neocash didn't bother me much. I was upset but I kept on playing. But the way they sell neocash is just disgusting.

A few thoughts



I'm betting that's Economic Profit, not Accounting Profit.

Economic costs incorporate the Opportunity Costs of production (effectively, the amount of money the firm could have earned by investing in something other than Neopets), there's no actual money lost by Neopets from this, its just a "we could have been earning more if we did X instead of continuing Neopets." As a result, the Economic cost is always (far) higher than the account costs, and as a result, to be making an economic profit, or to be "breaking even" in terms of Economic costs means you usually are making an incredibly large Accounting Profit so that the producers are happy to stay at Neopets, rather than look elsewhere.

Though they may need to keep a high revenue to keep Viacom happy, they are far from running out of money at the Neopets offices.



Anybody good with Internet/Consumer Law that can explain this? I know of plenty of sites which you can buy internet items permanantly. This seems more like "Ummm, we have a legal reason kinda almost sorta maybe, but we can't tell you because its long". I want to know exactly why they have to be "rental" items, as did the person asking the question. This doesn't answer the question and to me it puts out the message "You're stupid and won't understand the legal reasons"

If you really can't sell them permanently, have them "rented" for 10 years or something. Surely there's no law saying "You can't buy pixels for more than 1 year"



This is one of the incredibly highly used tactics in selling things to consumers. Like test driving a car, or trying on clothes, or the "no-pressure discussions". They want people to be browsing the mall so they're more likely to buy it. Why else would they let non-buyers try on the goods? If they truly wanted to use it as nothing more than a "see what it will look like before you buy it", it would only be open to those with Neocash on hand. Having it open to anybody (regardless of age) lets them see it, want it and (if needed) go nag to their parents till they get it. There's "no pressure" to buy, but you'll do it anyway.



This question just annoyed me. The user suggested making it optional and they didn't address it at all, they effectively just said "No, we want it this way. Its going to be this way" Then they tried passing it off as "if you are annoyed by it, its your fault for not posting enough"



You don't have to stop, but you also don't have to pour your time into crap like Neovision and items that the vast majority of people don't need. I'd rather see the Battledome revamped a bit, the Pound brought back up, the Rainbow Pool updated and the site sped up a bit in areas (IE: Get rid of the Flash everywhere) than new (unwearable) socks and Sugar-Filled Faerie Straws. Yes, the bosses may be forcing things on you like Neovision, but that doesn't mean you need to devote most of your staff on that and stick the remainder on items barely anybody will use.

I'm apalled that the pound has been down for months now, I know you have other jobs to do, but quite frankly, this should have been made a priority.







"If you are reading this, you are clearly a little kid who has no understanding about the world. We'll just pat you on the head, put a 'hip and relevant' example in front of you and call it an answer"

--------------

Quite frankly, the editorial annoyed me. They are trying to seem so innocent, when they're not. I wouldn't mind as much if they came out and said "We want more money" - I'd be incredibly annoyed, but at least they'd be being honest about it. This editorial was designed to look honest but was just an over-patronizing way of pretending they are righteous in their actions.

Come on you guys, cut neo a break! I personally like the editorial this week, and it makes me happy to see them actually addressing questions like this! Especially them addressing questions that weren't even SUBMITTED, that were just talked about on the neoboards. Frankly, I'm very happy with this editorial, and it made me feel much better about the recent additions to the site. Also, I'm not sure where you guys got the impression that neopets is nearing bankruptcy, i saw nothing that even hinted at that. They simply stated that they need to make money in order to keep the site running, which is a VALID, REASONABLE STATEMENT. Lets show neo a little love for actually addressing our questions instead of ignoring them. *gives neo a big, fluffy hug*
Practice positivity! ^^

after reading the editorial i'm not angry, but then i didn't really care about the implementation of the pay for stuff on neopets. and as for the neoboards i only use them for faerie quests now that i use ppt.

i don't think tnt is trying to appease us or trying to hide their desire to make money. if you don't want to pay for neopets, then don't. if you're complaining that tnt is trying to appeal kids so they'll run winging to their parents to pay for things, i think you're using slightly faulty reasoning. what kind of parents are so weak that they'll pay for something online simply because the kid asked for it. it's not tnt's responsibility to care for or cater to children. i realize that tnt is now in the 'children's market,' but remember it was initially created to preoccupy bored university students.

i'm tired of hearing complaints about the pound too. simply because you or other highly vocal neopians complain about this one issue doesn't mean that it's the only issue. others care about the advent of new games, a revamp of the battledome system, making the bank, trading post or auctions work. new content is time intensive. one person can only go so fast on a project. perhaps you could work on the html code to find a fix? to use a horrible buzz word, be pro-active.

ultimately you are the one who decides if you want to play neopets, pay for neopets, or complain about something that you in no way affect. if you really want to change neopets go work for them, work to own viacom, or make a donation to neopets so they can be independently wealthy. (i'm just tired of people complaining, but refusing to actually do something about it. and no, writing angry emails doesn't count as doing something)

as a side thought, perhaps the real life purchased items have to expire within a certain time because tnt can still freeze accounts. it gets tricky when you deny someone something they've paid for.

What sort of parents will buy the new barbie, or racing car, or an ice cream, or a pokemon game just because the kid asks for it? Parents with young children quite often cave into their kids nagging for something.



Do you really think Neopets would accept coding done by somebody else? Even if they checked if for bugs and everything, I highly doubt they'd let an outsider code for their site



They make a couple of billion dollars profit a year, to become the majority shareholder in Viacom would be practically impossible for 99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of all Neopets users



They can freeze premium members even if they have paid for a year or more of premium and they are under no obligation to pay them back. I just don't see why the items "have to" expire. Or why the expiration can't be something like 3 years.

I dont care about the money issue, legal issues, or Viacom. I just cant stand Neopets editorials that make me roll my eyes and scream "Answer the original question!" or "That makes no sense!" loudly to my computer screen. Much like the 'we need artists in order to update the rainbow pool, even though the images are already drawn, and all we really need to do is fix the image locations. We dont wanna put a warning at the top either, so just deal.'

In this editorial, it was the pet images on the boards answer that got my eyes rolling. The answerer ignored the entire portion of the question that asked why the feature couldnt be optional, and went off on an attempt to give a clever comment to defend the feature's existence. Why not say 'optional is too much work. We dont want to code it, and we didnt want it to be optional in the first place.' instead of 'If it bothers you, you're playing Neopets for the wrong reasons!'

On a side note, I couldnt buy Neocash with my verified paypal account, because I only have my bank account attached to it. Annoying And I too would like to hear the legal reason behind the expiring items, just out of curiosity, since other sites I visit offer non-expiring items for real cash.

I may have missed it, but did anyone bring up how TNT can't really promise us anything by their own admission? If the bosses say "We're going to make Neopets a pay to play site" the staff can complain and protest, but unless they want to be unemployed they have to go along with it.

Anyone who's complaining that we shouldn't be complaining, please consider our right to complain. It exists.

A couple people have mentioned it--that there are two "sides" in the meetings, and that TNT is not the same as Viacom.

This wouldn't bother me so much, because as Shapu said it's not affecting regular gameplay, but two things bother me.
Firstly, the people who are forced to work on the NC mall and such are not able to work on the "free" parts of Neopets. This means the non-paying parts of the site will continue to suffer from neglect.
Second, I'm tired of vague answers and answers written for eight year olds.

I bet we never get a real answer, even though I could see one existing. For instance, if items don't expire within three months, maybe it's illegal to freeze the account and therefore lock out access to a permanent item. How much you wanna bet it's something simple like that, but they don't want to tell us because they might mention the dreaded freezing policy?

On the other hand, I do think the "optional pets on Neoboards" question was answered.


And the answer about fixing old problems was really insightful. There was a tired feeling to that answer---and "Trust us, we're just as frustrated about it all as you all are."
Doesn't that sound like they're getting assignments they don't want at all? "Fine, Jones, you can work on the pound...as soon as you've written a bunch of new code to create a cash-for-items mall, worked out the entire new plot from beginning to end, and increased the site's profit 300%."